The protection of freedom of speech applied to litigation is an
important principle, even when the claims are not supported by the
facts.

We have trust in the civil procedures to discover the truth;
however, what corrupts the process, from my perspective, is when
some law firms litigate based on the amount of retainer, rather than
the merits.

Jim




--- In gentlewindvictims@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Starrett" <chs@...>
wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, "blatantly frivolous" can mean a lot of things to a
lot
> of people and thus judges are hesitant to act proactively. Filing
> lawsuits is protected free speech and the process of sanctioning
> lawyers must also follow due process procedures. It is easier said
> than done.
>
> --- In gentlewindvictims@yahoogroups.com, "jfbergin" <jfbergin@>
wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > In "blatantly" frivolous lawsuits, the Judge could be more
> > proactive, when the facts are presented, to sanction law firms
that
> > contrive SLAPP lawsuits on behalf of organizations and
individuals
> > who provide the firm with large retainers with the intent of
> > silencing whistle blowers. This type of gambit, when stripped of
> > legal incentives, sometimes has more to do with the so-
> > called "business model" than ethics or the law.
> >
> > Fortunately, most lawyers have higher standards.
> >
> > Jim
> >
>